[cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

Fri Feb 11 14:56:41 EST 2011

Good to know, thanks for correcting me.

-Ryan

On Feb 11, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Matthew Ballard wrote:

Urgent Priority can be disabled on translation patterns.  I believe on some of the older versions of CUCM it couldn’t be disabled, but any even semi-recent version it can be (certainly on 7.1.3 which is what I am running).

Matthew

From: Ryan Ratliff [mailto:rratliff at cisco.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:03 AM
To: Matthew Ballard
Cc: Paul; Scott Voll; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

Correct enbloc dialing will not match a shorter digit pattern even if it has urgent priority.
By the way you can't disable urgent priority on translation patterns.

-Ryan

On Feb 11, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Matthew Ballard wrote:

Although a necessary evil from the sound of it, being that it sounds like he needs both translation patterns to work for his situation.

Also, the T.302 timer doesn't come into effect if the person dials the number before pressing Dial/picking up the phone (at least on phones that support it).

Matthew

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul [mailto:asobihoudai at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 10:28 AM
To: Scott Voll
Cc: Matthew Ballard; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

Now you've broken your translation pattern so people have to wait for the T302 timer to finish. If you haven't modified it, which most people I know do not, then they'll have to wait for 15s for the translation pattern to work.

________________________________
From:Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To:Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com>
Cc:Matthew Ballard <mballard at otis.edu>; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Sent: Fri, February 11, 2011 10:09:40 AM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

urgent priority was the ticket.

Thanks

Scott

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com> wrote:

Your call is matching 5XXX because the translation pattern is in the none

partition. The translation patterns are marked as urgent priority as
default so as soon as you dial 5 and any other three digits, it will
use that pattern configured. You need to place those translation
patterns in another partition that isn't reachable from the calling
search space of the device you're calling from. As it has been stated,
the none partition is implicitly placed in all calling search spaces.
So long as you keep 5XXX in the none partition, you prevent any calls starting with 5 with more than 4 digits.

________________________________
From:Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To:Matthew Ballard <mballard at otis.edu>

Cc:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Sent: Fri, February 11, 2011 9:16:08 AM

Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

But unfortunately it is matching 5031234567 to 5XXX instead of 503123.4[0-7]XX.
both of which are Translation patterns in the <NONE> partition.  Why
would
5XXX

be more specific?

Scott

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Matthew Ballard <mballard at otis.edu> wrote:

From what I remember, UCM combines all CSSes available to the phone,
including that of both the DN in use and the phone, where <None> is
automatically included, and only after combined it organizes the list
by most specific to least specific.

So in the case below, as 51111 is more specific than 5XXXX, 51111 will
match first.

Matthew Ballard

From:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio
Fulgenzi
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 7:59 AM
To: Scott Voll

Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net

Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

The <None> partition is at the end of every calling search space and
is
searched

if no match is found in the partitions explicitly included.

The one thing I'm not clear on is if the <None> partition is searched
for a better match or if it is searched only if no matches are found.

For example:
  * Route Pattern 5XXXX in Group_A_Partition
  * DN 51111 in <None> partition
  * CSS Group_A_CSS contains Group_A_Partition.
  * DN 52222 assigned CSS of Group_A_CSS
  * DN 52222 dials 51111
  * what will 52222 reach? the route pattern or the DN 51111?

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
                            - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)

________________________________

From: "Scott Voll" <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To: "Ryan Ratliff" <rratliff at cisco.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 10:49:57 AM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

That is NOT what I wanted you to say.

Quick Follow up question.  Since I'm new to this environment, How does
the
NONE

partition work with other partitions in a CSS?  is the None Partition
at the
end

and I could "fix" this by putting the 503123.4567 translation into a
partition?

Thanks

Scott

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
It's a matter of whether the digits are sent enbloc or not.  I don't
believe CIPC supports enbloc so it will always send digits one at a
time (just like other phones do when dialing offhook) and thus will
always hit your 5XXX translation pattern.

-Ryan

On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Scott Voll wrote:

So I'm troubleshooting why my Corporate Directory does not work (10
digits
from

AD LDAP)

If I pick up the 7962 and dial 5031  the 7961 hits the 5XXX
translation
pattern

and goes to VM.  BUT if I enter 5031234567 and press Dial, it hits the
503123.4567 translation pattern and dials correctly the 4567.  Both
Translation

patterns are in the None partition.

BUT if I do the same thing on the IP communicator client weather I
pick up and dial or enter and dial it hits the 5XXX translation
because it dials the
numbers

one digit at a time rather than the full 10 digits like the 7961.

Looks to be a Bug with the IPC client or is it Working As Designed?

Ultimately I’m trying to dial the 10 digits from Corporate directory
which
gets

the 10 digits from AD LDAP.

Any idea of a work around?  I

TIA

Scott

PS.  CM 7.1.5, IPC 7.0.5.1, 7961 running 9.0.3S

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

____________________________________________________________________________________
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110211/b5bfc9c8/attachment.html>